Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
El Diablito

Fenix or FBW?

Recommended Posts

I like both. The FBW has this nice sounds of crew, passengers etc. which are really immersive. On the other hands the FMC does some stuff wrong, as fas as I understand it. Examples: 1. When I have a manual/discontinuity after takeoff and do a dir to waypoint XYZ after a little while, the FMC draws a direct straight line to XYZ from the point where did the DIR, instead of drawing a rounded curve. 2. When I delete a waypoint, it does procede directly without showing the flight plan in yellow and waiting for my "insert". Little stuff, maybe, but it somehow annoys me.

Right now I did a little trip to KCHA where I wanted to do the ILS to runway 02. There should be a DME arc segment from ZIROB to QUIDS and then straight to KCHA02. The flight plan screen showed a full arc instead and I had to do a DIR to MORRT.

The Fenix had no problem with this approach.

Edited by crimplene

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Noel said:

Umm, which statement that I made was "false" about Fenix?  You mean FBW is 98% of what Fenix is?  That is a rhetorical statement that can't be proven true or false by you, me or anyone else.  Do you actually believe there aren't plenty of people, like myself, who have not purchased Fenix because they're ultra happy w/ FBW?  Let me put it a different way and maybe you can follow the logic:  if FBW didn't exist, Fenix would garner all of the market of those seeking a HIGH QUALITY A320--and FBW certainly qualifies as HIGH QUALITY.  So in absolute effect:  Fenix lost those users to FBW.  Get it?  I hope so, if not read it again.

That‘s a very rare interpretation of the word „to lose“, usually to „lose“ something you have to have had it before. Semantics aside, of course one can debate if the FBW is 98% of what the Fenix offers, it‘s a factual statement with even a number on it. This is exactly what I‘m trying to say: Everybody would be fine if you just said „For my personal way of simming the FBW offers almost everything the Fenix does“. Instead you make it sound like your personal expectations are an objective fact with a measured number in percentages. Now if that is all rhetorical and opinion I could just say the Fenix is 98% of a real aircraft and the FBW is 10% of the Fenix. That alright with you because you it can‘t be proven true or false?

  • Like 4
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Fiorentoni said:

of course one can debate if the FBW is 98% of what the Fenix offers

Really?  Go ahead, enumerate them all and let's see how it they stack up.  Standing by now...

 


Noel

System:  7800x3D, Thermal Grizzly Kryonaut, Noctua NH-U12A, MSI Pro 650-P WiFi, G.SKILL Ripjaws S5 Series 32GB (2 x 16GB) 288-Pin PC RAM DDR5 6000, WD NVMe 2Tb x 1, Sabrent NVMe 2Tb x 1, RTX 4090 FE, Corsair RM1000W PSU, Win11 Home, LG Ultra Curved Gsync Ultimate 3440x1440, Phanteks Enthoo Pro Case, TCA Boeing Edition Yoke & TQ, Cessna Trim Wheel, RTSS Framerate Limiter w/ Edge Sync for near zero Frame Time Variance achieving ultra-fluid animation at lower frame rates.

Aircraft used in A Pilot's Life V2:  PMDG 738, Aerosoft CRJ700, FBW A320nx, WT 787X

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Noel.  I'm going to respect your choice of A320 sim.  I merely started engaging with you because I thought you would be somebody who who would enjoy stepping up to the next level.  Not to mention just a few weeks ago you were stubbornly declaring that you would not learn to fly the A320 because you had no interest in learning a new type.(Guess you changed your mind)

  I'm not going to argue this point anymore with you.  However I think the benefits are huge by keeping an open mind not influenced by pre conceived notions.  

  • Upvote 1

5800X3D, Gigabyte X570S MB, 4090FE, 32GB DDR4 3600 CL14, EVO 970 M.2's, Alienware 3821DW  and 2  22" monitors,  Corsair RM1000x PSU,  360MM MSI MEG, MFG Crosswind, T16000M Stick, Boeing TCA Yoke/Throttle, Skalarki MCDU and FCU, Saitek Radio Panel/Switch Panel, Spad.Next

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, Noel said:

Really?  Go ahead, enumerate them all and let's see how it they stack up.  Standing by now...

 

Nah I‘ll rather stick with saying the FBW is 10% of the Fenix. Apparently in your world statements are right until proven wrong.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, Fiorentoni said:

Now if that is all rhetorical and opinion I could just say the Fenix is 98% of a real aircraft and the FBW is 10% of the Fenix. That alright with you because you it can‘t be proven true or false?

Yep, when I see that statement I would understand there is no way you took the time to enumerate every attribute or even every functional attribute to do a truly valid comparison which would be difficult to do, so would ignore this statement as rhetorical, no make that ludicrous with the percentages you used.

Ok, I'm game let's start with what matters in a high quality plane in MSFS, in terms of functionality that will come into play for anyone trying to meet piloting quality scoring criteria which I've stated all over Avsim as an APL user, after hitting FLY in MSFS:

  1. I'm in the cockpit, turn on the batteries, enable Ext Power, dial up some brightess in the upper panel, and proceed to arm the Emergency Exit lights, turn on no smoking and seat belt signs, turn on crew O2, and on w/ the ADIRS switches.  
  2. Next, since it happens to be twilight, turn on the EFB and hit a preconfigured lighting scheme--lovely touch in the FBW. 
  3. Now to the MCDU.  I have my choice of using the automatically input OFP from MSFS WM planner, or using SimBrief's.  I use a hybrid approach because I enjoy using MSFS ATC:  I use the WM OFP, but before generating a plan in SimBrief, will take care to input the runways MSFS will use into SimBrief's Options interface.
  4. Now to the EFB to download SimBrief data.  Will load fuel thru the EFB, PAX, etc etc etc.
  5. Now back to the MCDU to start completing all the INIT, F-PLAN clean up as needed, PERF pages, etc.  I love the fact you can use your keyboard to input values in the MCDU which PMDG stated couldn't be done in their 737x due to limitations in MSFS.
  6. I've been loading thru GSX and use PACX both which work very well w/ the FBW.  
  7. I'm now starting the APU, flipping the beacon on, and enjoying crew communications at this point--very nicely done, if a little loud, and flipping the APU bleed on.
  8. I'm requesting pushback via GSX.  Meanwhile, have been loving the EFB's awesome checklists which have helped me develop flow in this previously foreign to me aircraft.  I release Ext Power, and back we go.
  9. Switch to Ignition, flip on the cutoffs, and so forth.
  10. Loving the awesome ECAM's monitoring capabilities.  This alone makes me feel better about flying as a PAX on this plane over 738
  11. Now we're getting ready to taxi after verifying MAX autobrake, flaps & trims set--love the feedback from the ECAM

That's enough to give you an idea.  The plane's VNAV works fabulously, perhaps if not identically to the real bird--but I've never come near the real bird anway.  I see FBW and Fenix are very likely going to be very similar, from a flow standpoint (w/ differences perhaps coming from their respective EFBs and Checklists) and the procedures you need to follow to make it work from gate to gate.  So when I say 98%, this is just a statement indicating my sense of just how basically similar they very likely are.  you already know I don't fly the Fenix, so that is a given, impression of it from watching tutorial videos and reading several commentaries--it's not the same of course, but it's very useful and can't be dismissed out of hand.

 

 

 


Noel

System:  7800x3D, Thermal Grizzly Kryonaut, Noctua NH-U12A, MSI Pro 650-P WiFi, G.SKILL Ripjaws S5 Series 32GB (2 x 16GB) 288-Pin PC RAM DDR5 6000, WD NVMe 2Tb x 1, Sabrent NVMe 2Tb x 1, RTX 4090 FE, Corsair RM1000W PSU, Win11 Home, LG Ultra Curved Gsync Ultimate 3440x1440, Phanteks Enthoo Pro Case, TCA Boeing Edition Yoke & TQ, Cessna Trim Wheel, RTSS Framerate Limiter w/ Edge Sync for near zero Frame Time Variance achieving ultra-fluid animation at lower frame rates.

Aircraft used in A Pilot's Life V2:  PMDG 738, Aerosoft CRJ700, FBW A320nx, WT 787X

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, Fiorentoni said:

Nah I‘ll rather stick with saying the FBW is 10% of the Fenix. Apparently in your world statements are right until proven wrong.

You were the first to bring this up, so back at you:  is it buyer's remorse that has you so desperately defending I don't know what?  I have no arguments here I'm only stating why I'm fine w/ FBW and don't need anything more as an A320 one fabulous one is enough for my needs.

8 hours ago, Fiorentoni said:

Instead you are fighting some weird non-buyer’s remorse of yours


Noel

System:  7800x3D, Thermal Grizzly Kryonaut, Noctua NH-U12A, MSI Pro 650-P WiFi, G.SKILL Ripjaws S5 Series 32GB (2 x 16GB) 288-Pin PC RAM DDR5 6000, WD NVMe 2Tb x 1, Sabrent NVMe 2Tb x 1, RTX 4090 FE, Corsair RM1000W PSU, Win11 Home, LG Ultra Curved Gsync Ultimate 3440x1440, Phanteks Enthoo Pro Case, TCA Boeing Edition Yoke & TQ, Cessna Trim Wheel, RTSS Framerate Limiter w/ Edge Sync for near zero Frame Time Variance achieving ultra-fluid animation at lower frame rates.

Aircraft used in A Pilot's Life V2:  PMDG 738, Aerosoft CRJ700, FBW A320nx, WT 787X

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, crimplene said:

I like both. The FBW has this nice sounds of crew, passengers etc. which are really immersive. On the other hands the FMC does some stuff wrong, as fas as I understand it. Examples: 1. When I have a manual/discontinuity after takeoff and do a dir to waypoint XYZ after a little while, the FMC draws a direct straight line to XYZ from the point where did the DIR, instead of drawing a rounded curve. 2. When I delete a waypoint, it does procede directly without showing the flight plan in yellow and waiting for my "insert". Little stuff, maybe, but it somehow annoys me.

Right now I did a little trip to KCHA where I wanted to do the ILS to runway 02. There should be a DME arc segment from ZIROB to QUIDS and then straight to KCHA02. The flight plan screen showed a full arc instead and I had to do a DIR to MORRT.

The Fenix had no problem with this approach.

Right now those discrepancies don't bother me but I can see why they would if you flew both types and could compare. It's interesting though, I was sure FBW had completely revamped the logic for the FMC to fix all the straight lines etc, perhaps it was just improved upon and there's still work to do.

One thing for sure, using the FBW without VNAV is a complete non runner for me in future. Given how used to it I've become in the PMDG, there's just no way I can fly a commercial jet without it now.

  • Like 2

B450 Tomahawk Max / Ryzen 7 5800x3D / RTX 3060ti 8G / Noctua NH-UI21S Max Cooling / 32G Patriot RAM / 1TB NVME / 450G SSD / Thrustmaster TCA & Throttle Quadrant / Xiaomi 32" Wide Curved Monitor 1440p 144hz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, El Diablito said:

One thing for sure, using the FBW without VNAV is a complete non runner for me in future. Given how used to it I've become in the PMDG, there's just no way I can fly a commercial jet without it now.

You're not using the EXP version?


Noel

System:  7800x3D, Thermal Grizzly Kryonaut, Noctua NH-U12A, MSI Pro 650-P WiFi, G.SKILL Ripjaws S5 Series 32GB (2 x 16GB) 288-Pin PC RAM DDR5 6000, WD NVMe 2Tb x 1, Sabrent NVMe 2Tb x 1, RTX 4090 FE, Corsair RM1000W PSU, Win11 Home, LG Ultra Curved Gsync Ultimate 3440x1440, Phanteks Enthoo Pro Case, TCA Boeing Edition Yoke & TQ, Cessna Trim Wheel, RTSS Framerate Limiter w/ Edge Sync for near zero Frame Time Variance achieving ultra-fluid animation at lower frame rates.

Aircraft used in A Pilot's Life V2:  PMDG 738, Aerosoft CRJ700, FBW A320nx, WT 787X

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, crimplene said:

When I have a manual/discontinuity after takeoff and do a dir to waypoint XYZ after a little while, the FMC draws a direct straight line to XYZ from the point where did the DIR, instead of drawing a rounded curve

Did you try this recently? Curved DTO paths have been in for more than a year.

22 hours ago, crimplene said:

When I delete a waypoint, it does procede directly without showing the flight plan in yellow and waiting for my "insert"

This is how this FMS works in real life.

22 hours ago, crimplene said:

Right now I did a little trip to KCHA where I wanted to do the ILS to runway 02. There should be a DME arc segment from ZIROB to QUIDS and then straight to KCHA02. The flight plan screen showed a full arc instead and I had to do a DIR to MORRT.

DME arcs are fully supported, but keep in mind both aircraft use different navdata sources. It might be a navdata issue. Do you have navigraph data installed in the base sim?


Developer - FlyByWire Simulations

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, holland786 said:

Did you try this recently? Curved DTO paths have been in for more than a year.

This is how this FMS works in real life.

DME arcs are fully supported, but keep in mind both aircraft use different navdata sources. It might be a navdata issue. Do you have navigraph data installed in the base sim?

Maybe I should have said that I used the second newest Dev version. When loaded the plane I got the message that a new version was available.

1. Yesterday. I was a little bit surprised because I didn't expect this behaviour.
2. My memory might be wrong but is there a difference between A320 CEO and NEO? Or is the Fenix wrong? Or do I mix up two things? Probably the last, I am onboard the A310 now and have no time to check.
3. I have the latest Navigraph data installed. I forgot to edit my comment later, so I have to admit that somehow the FMC display switched to the correct approach course the second I pressed DIR. So the correct arc segment followed by the correct straight line to the airport was on display then. Maybe it was a glitch. Should have taken a screen shot of the wrong flight plan path on the display.

The Fenix is not free from little bugs, too, btw. For example, it happens on random that the autothrottle accelerates to S speed all of a sudden when in Approach mode with flaps already on 2 or 3.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, crimplene said:

My memory might be wrong but is there a difference between A320 CEO and NEO? Or is the Fenix wrong? Or do I mix up two things? Probably the last, I am onboard the A310 now and have no time to check.

Keep in mind the A32NX models the Honeywell FMS computer while Fenix has the Thales version. One of the differences is that Thales creates temporary flight plans for more modifications than the Honeywell one does, which will often let you delete stuff without confirming.

Either versions could be on CEO or NEO in real life.

  • Like 2
  • Upvote 1

Developer - FlyByWire Simulations

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the clarification. I forgot that those planes do not use the same FMS.

What I like very much is that the FBW goes through all the steps when loading an Aircraft State. It needs a few minutes but somehow it feels very immersive. And: The MCDU display brightness can be adjusted with the mouse wheel. Little stuff like that is important.

 

Edited by crimplene

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just took the FBW for a spin and loaded a flight and completed it with no issues! First time for me. I may get the Fenix at some point but I'm happy to learn with the FBW. My only issue is steering during taxi, OMG I couldn't track a straight line to save my life! and oversteering like crazy. Any ideas what I could be doing wrong with this?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is much to like about both aircraft, a point some of us have been trying to suggest in this thread. The fact that each model sports a different variant (CEO vs. Neo), a somewhat different FMS computer (Honeywell vs. Thales), a different EFB, and a different set of features overall is what makes it fun and interesting to have and to fly both. The “either or” mentality is a shame, since both are rewarding to fly and the differences add variety while keeping you on your toes.

Rich

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Tom Allensworth,
    Founder of AVSIM Online


  • Flight Simulation's Premier Resource!

    AVSIM is a free service to the flight simulation community. AVSIM is staffed completely by volunteers and all funds donated to AVSIM go directly back to supporting the community. Your donation here helps to pay our bandwidth costs, emergency funding, and other general costs that crop up from time to time. Thank you for your support!

    Click here for more information and to see all donations year to date.
×
×
  • Create New...